the person of Christ, and the precise amount of ours when applied to the Son, is this, that although it be implied in the name of the Son, that he proceeded from the Father, and although, in reference to his proceeding from God, he be called the only begotten of the Father, yet the essential glory and perfections of the Father and the Son are the same.

It is further to be stated, that while the Socinians believed the Christ to be a mere man, in whom an extraordinary measure of the power of God dwelt, while the Arians believed that the Christ was composed of a super-angelical spirit, and a human body, those who hold the third opinion believe that Christ assumed, at the incarnation, the complete human nature into union with the divine; in other words, that the body of Christ was animated by a human soul, and this soul was so united with the Godhead that the divine and human nature formed one person. I enter not at present into the grounds of this third opinion. I mean only to state what it is, and in order to assist your apprehension of both parts of it, I shall recite to you a part of the Nicene Creed, by which this third opinion was more clearly defined than it had been before, and those parts of the confessions of the two established churches in Britain, by which it appears that both of them have adopted the third opinion concerning the person of Christ. The words of the Nicene Creed, translated literally from the Greek, are these: "We believe in one God, the Father, Almighty, maker of all things, both visible and invisible, and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only begotten of the Father, that is to say, of the substance of the Father, God of God, light of light, very God of very God, begotten not made, of the same substance with the Father, by whom all things were made both in heaven and in earth, who for us men, and for our salvation, came down, and was incarnate, being made man." The second of the thirty-nine articles of the church of England is in these words: "The Son, which is the word of the Father, begotten from everlasting of the Father, the very and eternal God, of one substance with the Father, took man's nature in the womb of the Blessed Virgin, of her substance, so that two whole and perfect natures, that is to say, the godhead and manhood, were joined together in one person, never to be divided, whereof is one Christ, very God and very man.” The words of our Confession of Faith are: "The Son of God, the second person in the Trinity, being very and eternal God, of one substance, and equal with the Father, did, when the fulness of time was come, take upon him man's nature, with all the essential properties and common infirmities thereof, yet without sin, being conceived by the power of the Holy Ghost, in the womb of the Virgin Mary, of her substance, so that two whole perfect and distinct natures, the Godhead and the Manhood, were inseparably joined together in one person; without conversion, composition or confusion, which person is very God, and very man, yet one Christ."

CHAPTER II.

SIMPLEST OPINION CONCERNING THE PERSON OF CHRIST.

HAVING stated the three opinions concerning the person of Christ, to which all others may be reduced, I proceed to compare the grounds upon which they rest.

And here I must begin with observing, that general reasonings concerning the probability of any of these opinions, or its apparent suitableness to the end of Christ's manifestation, ought not to enter into this comparison. Ingenious men have said plausible things in the way of general reasoning in support of all the three. It may to some appear difficult to balance one of the speculations against the other, because men will be inclined to give a preference according to the complexion of their understanding, and their former habits of thinking. But you will be satisfied that such reasonings are of little or no weight in the scale of evidence, when you recollect how soon they lead us beyond our depth. Probability in this subject depends upon a multitude of circumstances, which are not within the sphere of our observation. Fitness or expediency in this subject depends upon the order and the designs of that universal government of which we see only a part. The fact, that Jesus Christ appeared in the land of Judea the teacher of a new religion, could not have been investigated by reason, but like all other facts is received upon credible testimony. The particular character and dignity of this person therefore, is a matter of revelation to be gathered from the books that inform us of his appearance; and the only solid ground of any opinion concerning his character is a right interpretation of the books in which it is described. After we have attained by sound criticism the information which is thus afforded us, reason may be employed in vindicating the opinion which that information warrants us to hold, in bringing forward those views of its expediency which revelation enables us to assign, and in balancing the difficulties which may adhere to it, against those difficulties and objections which appear to attend other opinions not taught by Scripture. Reasoning comes here in its proper place to support our faith, by being opposed to other reasonings that attempt to shake it, and to rescue the opinion that is delivered in the word of God from the charge of absurdity. But we profess to learn the opinion from the Scriptures; and we hold it with firmness, because it is revealed.

This general observation suggests the plan upon which I mean to proceed in comparing the grounds of the three opinions. I defer all speculations concerning them, till we have learned what the Scrip

tures teach. I begin with the simplest propositions, advancing, as the information of Scripture leads us, to those which are farther removed from ordinary apprehension; and in this way, I shall not arrive at the most intricate parts of the subject, till our minds are established in the belief of those facts which ought to guide our reasonings. This patient method of proceeding is not the most favourable to disputation upon this subject; it is not the best calculated for lecturing upon it in a showy amusing manner; but it appears to me that in which I ought to persevere, as the only method becoming our distance, and the certain method of attaining truth.

The simplest opinion concerning the person of Christ is, that he was merely a man, os avgwяos; and the advocates of this opinion rest it upon numberless passages of Scripture, upon a solution of those declarations concerning Christ, which appear to be inconsistent with their opinion, and upon the insuperable difficulties in which they represent all other opinions as involved. I lay aside at present all consideration of these difficulties, because I consider every speculation concerning them, as calculated to create a prejudice either for or against the evidence that is to be examined; and I direct your attention only to the Scripture grounds upon which this opinion is rested, and the declarations of Scripture by which it is opposed.

1.

I take the Scripture grounds of this opinion from a book published about the year 1773 by Mr. Lindsey, who gave the world a pledge of his honesty, by resigning his preferment in the Church of England, because he held this opinion. The following arguments and testimonies, he says, will abundantly show that Christ was a man like ourselves, saving those extraordinary gifts of divine wisdom and power by which he was distinguished from the rest of mankind. The prophecies that went before concerning Christ speak of him as a man,-the seed of the woman; the seed of Abraham; a prophet like to Moses; the son of David. 2. In consequence of these predictions, the Jews in all times have expected the Messiah to be a man. "Hath not the Scripture said," observe the people in the gospel of John, "that Christ cometh of the seed of David, and out of the town of Bethlehem, where David was ?" 3. Christ's appearance in the world; his birth; his increase in wisdom and stature; and the visible circumstances of his condition answered to the prophecies concerning him that he was to be a man. 4. Christ continually spake of himself as a man, the son of man being the phrase by which he commonly designed himself; and the son of God, the title which he sometimes assumed, admitting of an interpretation which does not contradict his being a man. 5. John, his forerunner, calls him a man. And, 6. The four evangelists show by their narration that they took him to be a man; and in the other books of the New Testament he is often so designed.

The testimonies which Mr. Lindsey has collected under these heads* prove that Christ was truly a man; they undoubtedly convey an impression that he was a man in all respects like us; and, if they contained the whole doctrine of Scripture concerning the nature and person of Christ, the first opinion would claim to be received upon the

* Sequel to Apology, by Theophilus Lindsey, ch. 7.

highest possible evidence. But Mr. Lindsey is aware that there are passages in Scripture which appear to contradict this opinion. Like all those who have agreed with him in opinion, he attempts to give a solution of them; and the point that must be considered is, whether there are declarations in Scripture of such a kind, as to efface the impression made by the testimonies collected under the six heads now mentioned, and to show that the first opinion rests upon a partial view of Scripture.

CHAPTER III.

PRE-EXISTENCE OF JESUS.

THE philosophy which you have learned has completely exploded the fanciful doctrine of some ancient sects, that the souls of men existed before they animated those bodies with which we behold them connected. You know that this doctrine supposes a fact, which is no where revealed, which is not vouched by human testimony, which is not supported by any solid argument, and is contradicted by the principle of consciousness. You believe that the souls of men began to exist with their bodies; and, although you cannot explain the time or the manner of the union between these two companions, you never ascribe to the being of the man any date more ancient than the first formation of his body. If then there be evidence that Christ had a being before he was conceived of the Virgin Mary, he cannot be a man like us. He may be truly a man with all the essential properties of human nature, so that there is no impropriety in ascribing to him the name of man, or the Son of Man. But the opinion of those who consider him as os agros, nothing more than man, must be false. Accordingly all those who hold the second and third opinions, oppose to the Socinian system one simple position, viz. there is evidence from Scripture of the pre-existence of Jesus Christ. This position is sufficient to overturn the first opinion, and it is necessary to lay a foundation for the second and third. For, although it does not follow from the pre-existence of Christ, either that he is the most exalted creature in the universe, or that he is God, yet, if he did not exist before he was born of Mary, he cannot be either the one or the other.

A position which contradicts the first opinion, and which is assumed in the other two, seems to be the proper point from which to set out in examining the three opinions concerning the person of Christ. Unless you are satisfied of the truth of this position, you will not be disposed to give yourselves much trouble in canvassing the second and third opinions. But if you find evidence, that by his pre-existence he is more than man, it will be natural to proceed to inquire how far he is exalted above man, whether he is a creature of a higher rank, or whether he be entirely exempted from the order of creatures.

In examining this position, I shall first bring forward those passages of Scripture, which teach plainly that our Saviour did pre-exist; and I shall next direct your attention to those passages, which ascribe to him different actions in his state of pre-existence. From the first set of passages, I do not mean to derive any thing more than simply